Legal dribble or not?

BillyMac

just another ref wrote
If not, the ball hasn't hit the floor, so the dribble hasn't started yet. Either way, no violation.

I deem that in this play the ball was accidentally and unintentionally fumbled, that the "first dribble" never occurred because the ball never hit the floor, and that it's legal if the player decided to start a new dribble.

Check?

SNIPERBBB

BillyMac wrote
I retract my last move. Maybe it is a fumble. Did the player intentionally plan to "dribble" the ball off his foot. I can't read minds anymore, but I doubt it very much. So maybe it was accidentally and unintentionally fumbled? You can fumble and dribble, right?

Your move.

I don't really see how a player can release a dribble and have it hit his/her foot and come straight back up without wearing some weird shoes. If the ball is fumbled and comes back up off the foot, I do not see a problem. But if it is controlled, it would have to be a violation when the hand(s) touch the ball again before it hits the floor.

BillyMac

SNIPERBBB wrote
But if it is controlled, it would have to be a violation when the hand(s) touch the ball again before it hits the floor.

Do you actually think that the player intentionally planned to "dribble" the ball off his foot? In this case, I don't think that you have to be a mind reader.

And anyway? I've already "deemed" this to be a fumble. Legally, there is no way in the world to override a deeming.

just another ref

BillyMac wrote
I deem that in this play the ball was accidentally and unintentionally fumbled, that the "first dribble" never occurred because the ball never hit the floor, and that it's legal if the player decided to start a new dribble.

Check?

It was not a fumble. The ball was released to start a dribble. This was a given in the OP.

Checkmate

BillyMac

just another ref wrote
It was not a fumble. The ball was released to start a dribble. This was a given in the OP. Checkmate

Good point, but I've already deemed this. Too late.

just another ref

BillyMac wrote
Good point, but I've already deemed this. Too late.

Go look for pictures of chess pieces, then report back to us.

Next year.😃

SNIPERBBB

BillyMac wrote
Do you actually think that the player intentionally planned to "dribble" the ball off his foot? In this case, I don't think that you have to be a mind reader.

And anyway? I've already "deemed" this to be a fumble. Legally, there is no way in the world to override a deeming.

You do not have to "mind read" if the player pushes the ball to the floor. Batting is where you have to use your mind-reading powers.

BillyMac

just another ref wrote
Go look for pictures of chess pieces, then report back to us. Next year.

Wait a minute here? You are out of order trying to override my deeming, and I get double secret probation? Just doesn't seem fair? Who's the Forum parliamentarian?

BillyMac

SNIPERBBB wrote
You do not have to "mind read" if the player pushes the ball to the floor. Batting is where you have to use your mind-reading powers.

A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) or pushes the ball to the floor once or several times.

Does the ball actually have to hit the floor for it to be a dribble?

Jurassic Referee

Scrapper1 wrote
A1 receives a pass and releases the ball to start a dribble. The ball hits the top of his foot, never touching the floor, and bounces straight up. A1 then bats the ball to the floor.

Violation for touching the ball twice during the same dribble, as per the RULING of 4.15.4SitD(a)-"Violation because the ball was touched twice by A1's hand(s) during a dribble before it touched the floor."

SNIPERBBB

BillyMac wrote
A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats (intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) or pushes the ball to the floor once or several times.

Does the ball actually have to hit the floor for it to be a dribble?

Nope.

just another ref

Jurassic Referee wrote
Violation for touching the ball twice during the same dribble, as per the RULING of 4.15.4SitD(a)-"Violation because the ball was touched twice by A1's hand(s) during a dribble before it touched the floor."

So if a player is holding the ball, tosses it from one hand to the other, then pushes it to the floor, is that a violation?

Adam

just another ref wrote
So if a player is holding the ball, tosses it from one hand to the other, then pushes it to the floor, is that a violation?

No, because the dribble doesn't start until he pushes it to the floor. This call hinges completely on whether A1 has to bat the ball "into the air" in order to be liable for this violation.

just another ref

Snaqwells wrote
No, because the dribble doesn't start until he pushes it to the floor.

That was my point above.

And even if it is during the dribble, I see the ball hitting a foot the same as hitting the floor. What if it's an opponent's foot? It hits and comes straight back up to the dribbler's hand, (very unlikely I know, but no more unlikely than off his own foot) is this a violation?

BillyMac

Anything that I deemed, I now undeem.

I don't have another move because I'm stuck on the floor. Literally. The "pushes the ball to the floor" part of the definition is confusing me.

Adam

just another ref wrote
That was my point above.

And even if it is during the dribble, I see the ball hitting a foot the same as hitting the floor. What if it's an opponent's foot? It hits and comes straight back up to the dribbler's hand, (very unlikely I know, but no more unlikely than off his own foot) is this a violation?

Opponents foot, I'd consider that an interrupted dribble that touches an opponent. New dribble.

just another ref

Snaqwells wrote
Opponents foot, I'd consider that an interrupted dribble that touches an opponent. New dribble.

It's not an interrupted dribble because it didn't get away from the dribbler. It came straight back up. That is very unlikely, maybe even impossible, but it's still a given. The dribble didn't end, because the touch by the opponent caused no loss of control.

Adam

just another ref wrote
It's not an interrupted dribble because it didn't get away from the dribbler. It came straight back up. That is very unlikely, maybe even impossible, but it's still a given. The dribble didn't end, because the touch by the opponent caused no loss of control.

I'm considering this an interrupted dribble. The fact that a dribbler cannot possibly intend to dribble off his opponent's foot tells me that if it does, it got away from him. The fact that it, by a fluke of physics, bounced straight back to him does not change this, IMO.

Raymond

Jurassic Referee wrote
Violation for touching the ball twice during the same dribble, as per the RULING of 4.15.4SitD(a)-"Violation because the ball was touched twice by A1's hand(s) during a dribble before it touched the floor."

I would agree if A1 had already batted the ball to floor at least once. But in the OP I see it no different than standing in place and tossing the ball to himself before dribbling.

BillyMac

BadNewsRef wrote
I would agree if A1 had already batted the ball to floor at least once. But in the OP I see it no different than standing in place and tossing the ball to himself before dribbling.

Which means that he can legally start a new dribble. Can I deem this now?

« Previous Page Next Page »